CO2 can be removed from the atmosphere for less than $50/ton so why not do it?

Answer 1

How?

Answer 2

Let us assume we can do that. I am a pretty average guy, I drive a car to work, turn off the lights when I leave the room, manage my thermostat well ect. I emit about 10 tons of CO2 per year. $50 x 10 tons of CO2= $500. Thats $500 to remove just my emissions per year. multiply that by 300,000,000 americans and that costs $150,000,000,000(billion) PER YEAR! (more than double the Iraq spending bill recently approved by congress '$70,000,000,000'.) That's just the population, what about the businesses, how much do they emit? You're talking about AT LEAST doubling that previous figure. And then you have to factor in the 5 plus billion other people on this planet.

Answer 3

There's currently no safe, proven method of disposing of it (in the quantities that need to be removed).

"Once the CO2 arrives at its destination it must be compressed into a liquid so it can be injected into the ground--a step that typically consumes 20 per cent of the energy yielded by burning coal in the first place. Then a kilometre-deep hole must be drilled and the CO2 injected. From that day on, the geological formation must be closely monitored; should the gas ever escape, it has the potential to kill."

"...burying it in the ground is not so simple or safe - as the oil industry likes to remind us, drilling is expensive - and it's not a long-term solution since we will run out of convenient places to sequester the liquid CO2."

"All this talk of carbon sequestration can basically be seen as a delaying tactic, as a way to get government support and to keep the operation and construction of coal power plants more socially acceptable. It's the equivalent of saying: "Don't bother us, we're working on it!"

But even if we suppose that big coal starts to build the expensive gasification plants soon and that they can solve most of the technical problems with geosequestration, they are not saying that they want to replace old, extremely dirty plants with the new ones; they want to build new ones and keep the old ones. They almost certainly won't bear the liability of CO2 leaks from underground storage, so that's an extra cost for taxpayers, not to mention that the electricity coming from coal gasification plants that do carbon sequestration will be more expensive because a lot of energy is lost in the process of running the plants, in the actual sequestration operating, and the huge costs of building the pipelines, the plants, drilling the holes, maintenance & monitoring, etc, will be passed on to the customers (or they'll ask for subsidies - same difference)."

"The fastest and cheapest way to close down coal plants soon is probably investments in efficiency. Remember, it's a lot cheaper to save a watt of electricity than to produce one."

Answer 4

It is crazy. Since water vapor is the primary greenhouse gas (97% of the greenhouse factor), why don't you seek to remove it, rather than CO2? I do not hear Alberto Gore howling about water credits.

Answer 5

All animals exhale CO2 and plants convert it to O2 , simple plant a lot of grass and green plants

This works for a long time too.

Answer 6

$50 a ton??? That's huge!